Free Motion to Strike - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

' Felipe J Martinez #102001 _ __F\LEU ·-——I“0DGED
AsPc-TuEépn- same Rita Um I ,1____ RECEIVED »~- COPY
·¥$1)c§0OIii @22734 1 MAY 21 3 @06
_ 1 IN trim UNITED STATES 1J1s1‘ii1%5FLrE“tii”iH ,
__ 1 FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
.1 Felipe J. Martinez, 1 _ .CV03-1729 PHX RCB (LOA) .
11 Plaimifg PLAII»I·r¤I=I=s FICTION 11:: .s·mI1v.E11m»Ic>1
11 V5 FOR LEAVE TD AMEND
, , James W. Baird, et al., I _
, ` Defendants. _i .
11 PLAINTIFF MARTINEZ MOVES TO STRIKE DOCUMENTS 10*-I, 107, I1I¤I1, AND IZO
MFROH TI-IE RECORD, AND HDVE5 FOR LEAVE TO AMEND/RESUBHIT ONE
QRESPONSNE DOCUMENT TD DEFENDANT5 MOTION FOR SUMMARY TUIHENT 1
ez) FOR THE FOLLOIJING REASONS 2 1
1 J3 TI-IIS CASE I5 1NOw IN THE DISPOSITIVE r10TI0N1STAG-ES. I-IOI».IEVEI%,TI-IE
1 PLAINTIFF I-IAS BUNGLED I-us 1I:>I$1P0$I·rIvE1r·I0‘rI0I»1 .$uBr1IssI¤I·~I5 .50 BADLY,1I¤6
111EVI¤ENC.ED‘ BY DEFENDANE 23 PAGES OF OBTECTIONS (DOC.:L..‘L1.), TI-IAT 1
TAS CURRENTLY SUBMITTED, PLAIN'I`"IFF$1DlSPO$|TIVE VIOTIONS ARE FEARED TO
BE NOTHING MORE THAN A NASTE DF TI-IE COURTS TIME {-IND OONSIDERATION1.
1(DOC. IO'-}, IO7, AND HQ)
1 2) ON HAY .1., 2.004 PLAINTIFF SUBMITTED A1l#1OTION FOB LEAVE TO AVIEND
11I-IIS MOTION FOR SUMMARY 3'UDQEP1ENT,(DOC.. Ill) THIS FIOTION \·~./A5 GPANTED BY
11T`|-IECDURT TO TI-IE EXTENT THAT ‘1'I·-IE COURT WOULD QONSIDER THE'. I"IOT’ION AS
1 11A SUPPLEHENTAL1 REPLY TO DEPENDAN'5 RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF5 HOTION
1 FOP. ‘5UI*1I‘1ARY 3'UDGrl‘1ENT.(DOC..l223 1
1 3) AS PLAINTIFE BEGAN PREPARATION OF I-IIS SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY
1IN TI-IE I-IOPE OF ADDRESSING AND C¤RPIEC'FING1THE. 23 PAGES OF OE>‘J`ECTI¤N5
Case 2:03—cv—01729-RCB Document 125 I- l Filed 05/23/2006 Page 1 “0f3 l

SUBMITTED BY DEFENDANWSJ IT BECAHE INCREJASINGLY CLEAR TI-Ii¤FI' F’I..AINT`II=FS
. SUBMISSIONS WERE/ARE NOTHING- SI-IORT OI'; PATI-IIE“I'IC·.'TI-IIE,"r' ARE IMPRDPERLY
.FOR|“IA'ITED, REFETATIVE, LACK FOUNDATION, IPIPROPERLY INCLUDE OPINION
. AND ARGUMENTS IN THE STATEMENT QF FACTS, AND DECLARAT`ION5 , ANG QUITE
_ FRANKLWQ ARE A DISGRAGEFUL Et·IBARRA55HENT' NOT IJORTI-IY OF TI-IE COURTS
.'T'II*'IE AND CONSIDERATION IN TI-IEIR PRESENT STATE, FUH1-HERMOBE) FOR
PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT A SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY IN AN ATFEHPT TO ADDRESS
THESE DEFICIENCIE5, PLAINTIFF FEARS WOULD DO NOTI-IING MORE T HAN FURTI-IEE,
[C.ONFU5E"AND FRUSTRATE THE <;0uI=I·r IN TI-IEIFI A·r¤=:r·1P1*.S TO ¤zc.IPI-12R TI-Ia
. 'BUBVIISSIDNS.
_ '-I) TI-IE PLAINTIFF5 INADVERT‘ENT HISTAKES AFIE UNQUESTIONABLY DUE TO
TI-IE F/-ICT THAT PLAINTIFF IS A PROBE LITIGANT, WI-IO IS A LAYHAN IN TI-IE
.eLA\4,UNFAF1Iu=\R WITH DISPOSITIVE MOTION FORHATTING, AND TI-IE FEDERAL.
RULES OF EVIDENCE. AT TI-IE SANE ‘|'|I"'IE, PLAINTIFF IEEE: SINCERELY BELIEVE
HECAN SUBMIT A PROPERLY FORHATTED RESPONSIVE MOTION FOR TI-IE
COURTS CONSIDERATION, REQIJIRING LESS OF TI-IE C.DUFI'T$ VALUABLE TIME,
.. CGNSISTINCI OF LESS v0I.ur1u~10u£s PLEADINGS.
SJUPLAINTIFF J'U5E" RECIEVED OEFENDAN'|'.'5 REPLY IN SUPPORT OF TIAEIR
OBEEQTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS UNDISPIJTED FFIC.'1'5 IN SUPPORT OF I*‘10`|'ION FOR
eSUI"1*‘1ARY‘3'L!DG-HENT AND PLAINTIFFS STACFEFIENT OF DIEPUTED FACTTUAL ISSUE-E`:
(DOC. IZBI). IN REGARD TO SECTION IE, PLAINTIFF LIISHES TO TAKE THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO ASSURE TI-IE COURT, AS HELL A5 DEFENDANT5 COUNSEL,
'PLAINTIFF w£sHI:5 TO $·rn=uI-IE ·rI-uz As=0I=II&:r·1aI\IT¤¤I~I*¤t¤ D0cIJr··1ENTs, AND
. SIFIPLY AMEND I-U5 RESPONSE TO. DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMHARY
.L'.|`L>DG»I"‘IEN'I’ ONLY `TD ACILOVIPLISH TI-IE FOLLOWING OBZFECLTIVES . TD °I-RII'1
DUNN PLAINTIFF5 VOLUHINOUS PLEADING5, TD CORRECT OYIISSIONS AND
NDEFECTS OR ANY INADVERTENT ERRORS, AND 'TO MAKE IT QUIGKER}
Case 2:03—cv—01729—FICB Document @5 Filed 05/23/2006 Page 2 of 3

.vC\..EAF{ER, AND \"'|U.C.i-{ EASIER FOR THE COURT TD CONSIDER PLAINTIFF5.
QCASE ITION. PLAINTIFF DOES NOT. \»J.ISH.TO PRESENT NEW 5TATEt’IEN'I$
. HOF FAQT OR HATERIALLY ALTER THE QQNTENT OF THE DOCur1Eh·lTFa..PREVIOU5LY
DFILED, BUT RATHER MAKE THEP1. C.I..EAFIER,Al·4D PROPER \N..FORl*'I .AND
. SUBSTAMCE. NOT`|·;UNG· MORE.
. .. THEREFORE, IN LIGHT OP THE AFOREHENTWONED, THE PLAINTIFF
A.RE5PEC.TFUL1.Y REQUESTS THE COURT STRIKE FROM THE RECORD DOCUMENTS
..IO**Ij10'7, .‘I.IL°I,AND .1.2.0.
.. FUFTMERHORE, PLAINTIFF RESPECITFULLY REQUESTS TI-IE COURT A1.LDw’
WPLAINTYFF O DAY.5 TO RESPOND TO OEFENDAU15 MOTION FOR SUHMARY .
. . JUDGMENT (DOC . B2?).
TI-IIS REQUEST. I5 NOT MADE FOR THE PURPOSES OF DELAY, BUT.OL2·1’ OF
. ABSOLUTE NECESSITY. PLAIMTIFP \·J\L.L. NOT SEEK ANY. F.URT.I-AER .
..Ex·reueIo¤~1s A5 T0 oaswrrsvz l"'!OTi0N·S_, AM0 cones NO`TlY..DB.3'EC.T..TD
HDEFENDANTZS HAVING AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTU.NlTY.T0 REPLY.
REEBPEQTFULLY SUBMITTED THIS I3 DAY OF HAY, ZOOQ. . .
. . FELJPE HARTINEL, PLAINTIFF PRO SE
..C.;oPY OF Tr-uz FORGOING MAILED TI-IIS IB DAY OF HAY, mm TD: ..
. KELLEY J. MORRISSEY "
ASS1St3Ht Attorney General
_ State Bar No. 010158
1275 West W&Sh1HgtOH
_ ____Qhoenix, Arizona 85007-2926 _ _
Case 2:03—cv—01729—FICB Document 135 Filed 05/23/2006 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01729-RCB

Document 125

Filed 05/23/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01729-RCB

Document 125

Filed 05/23/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01729-RCB

Document 125

Filed 05/23/2006

Page 3 of 3